The 3D wasn't that bad, actually. I might have to rethink my stance on conversion...

Bad or not, it always comes down to a couple of 3D worthy shots (money shots). The rest is disposable. It's apparent that they only have a couple of big 3D scenes in their minds when they film the movie which to me is a bad thing. So if it's not filmed in 3D than besides those couple of scenes where the depth is obvious the movie will look flat. I don't want to pay for that.

I disagree.

There's certainly going to be a small percentage for whom the surcharge is the main complaint - - but for the vast majority of those opposed to 3D, the primary issue is aesthetics.

Disagree.

And surcharge is higher than $2.

The surcharge is a turn-off to audiences no doubt. But so to the aesthetics (but not to everyone - younger audiences seem to be ok with it).

I went to see Thor on half price (or tight ass) Tuesday. Wanted to see it in 2D but only 3D was available at that time. Instead of paying $9 had to pay $20 because it was in 3D and they don't discount 3D. Still watched it - but the 3D wasnt worth it.

The Hobbit I suspect will be great in 3D though. More akin to Avatar and Hugo than Titans etc.

Moviegoers surveyed say 3D pics are better

Case closed.

Dude, the other half probably are not even movie goers.

You're a 3D-cist.

Anyway, the vast majority of those open to the new, that tried out 3D, prefer it to 2D, which makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.

None of those people wear glasses.

They are missing out.

Ya know I was watching a film Saturday night that would probably be good for a 3D conversion. It was Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. There seemed to be more than a few effects in their that would pop out if it were 3D.

Have we been getting any percentages for the 3D shares of recent movie openings? Like Wrath of the Titans, The Lorax or Journey 2?

I wonder how many have seen Hugo in 3D given that its 3D was praised more than for any other movie in recent memory.

65% for Titans on OW.

LOL that is impressive given the bad word on the first film's 3D!

Clash of the Titans had a 52% share...hehe.

Anyway, the downwards trend of 2011 in terms of share. Remember when Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides had just a 46% 3D share? People expected for the share to go down to as low as 30-40% in future.

I think it will just stabilize now and remain in the 50-60% range for most films.

Proof that 3D will not die anytime soon:

http://www.mpaa.org/resources/5bec4ac9- ... 5455a9.pdf


People between the ages of 12-24 will keep it alive. Old peeps cant handle 3Ds awesomeness.

I think for male centric big blockbusters, 3d will remain popular.

TF3 did well on 3D and was heading to well over 370 million but got destroyed by DH2...

I wonder what will be the next $30+ milion opener to get more than 70% share in 3D.

It might seem too low to you....but can you even name any $30+ million opener that will likely get a 70+% share?

You think JP3D will open above $30 million?

We both know thsat's not going to happen, right? This is the best spot of the summer.

It was playing in 3D on 84% of the screens* - - so the 2D screenings must have been absolutely stuffed with true film aficionados who wanted to see the movie presented in quality 2D, instead of the shoddy 20% darker 3D post conversion.


( * 3,364 3D screens + 275 IMAX 3D screens out of a total of 4,349 screens, leaves a measly 710 2D screens, which still managed to do 40% of the business.)


Movie production companies will get successful rates of 3D viewings (aka surcharge bonus) one way or the other - - I bet if they show a movie on 100% 3D screens, they might even get close to a 100% 3D viewing rate!